[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 49 KB, 625x350, 1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10322215 No.10322215 [Reply] [Original]

Which is the correct interpretation of QM and why is it many-worlds?

>> No.10322220

pseudoscience, fuck off

>> No.10322360

Because it doesn't postulate a wavefunction reduction (collapse).

Instead, your mind becomes entangled with the system and you experience a single ket of the system+observer wavefunction.

>> No.10322372

>>10322215
>and why is it many-worlds?
Because the Flash says we are Earth-1 and we are the best, so the theory checks out.

>> No.10322383

>>10322372
HAHAHAhA BAZINGA XD

>> No.10322390

>>10322215
What I find amusing is that many-worlds, which is often disregarded as being science-fiction, actually makes the most satisfying logical sense.

>> No.10322394

>>10322215
lol the correct interpretation of QM is QM lmao
>b-but you can't def-
QM is probability theory shut the fuck up
>y-you can't have a neg-
says who? fuck off

>> No.10322399

>>10322394
QM logic makes it a different kind of probability theory though. Bayes theorem is not applicable.

>> No.10322403

>>10322399
>i-it's a different kind of prob
yeah generalized. and?

>> No.10322410

>>10322403
Just commenting, my assmad friend. It also has to do jack shit with negative values.

>> No.10322414

>>10322410
>jack shit with negative values
sorry, hon. didn't realize you were "special"

>> No.10322418

>>10322414
Well what the hell do you mean with your
>>y-you can't have a neg
The probabilities defined in QM can't be neggative you retard.

>> No.10322421

>>10322418
explain interference then

>> No.10322423

>>10322421
I have no fucking clue how can you think interference need "negative probabilities" or whatever your retarded ass is thinking.

>> No.10322426

>>10322390
Yet you won't explain why it makes sense?

>> No.10322433

>>10322390
>worries why electron goes left or right
>doesn't worry when universes pop up left and right

if this isn't religion, nothing is

>> No.10322434
File: 3 KB, 251x260, circle.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10322434

>>10322423
what happens if you try to come up with a theory that's like probability theory, but based on the 2-norm instead of the 1-norm? you get pic related (hope you at least took algebra or geometry)

>> No.10322440

>>10322434
Are you el arcón? You are literally spouting nonsense.

>> No.10322448
File: 5 KB, 347x239, interfere.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10322448

>>10322440
k

>> No.10322453

>>10322448
yes, a fucking ket and a wave function can be negative.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Born_rule

>> No.10322467

>>10322453
>probability amplitudes aren't probabilities

>> No.10322468

>>10322467
Not that guy, but yeah, probability amplitudes aren't probabilities, the same way vectors aren't distances.

>> No.10322471

>>10322467
yes, but they certainly aren't fucking negative.

>> No.10322479

>>10322468
>the same way vectors aren't distances
ok i'm done since this is going to devolve into philosophical ramblings

>> No.10322484

>>10322360
Yea, because wavefunction collapse only happens from a certain perspective.

Basically, you are not seperate from the universe, you are the universe.

>> No.10322547

>>10322479
vectors can be anything, retard
a common one is Area

https://youtu.be/f5liqUk0ZTw?t=1m20s

>> No.10322723

>>10322215
many words would be a better way to describe its use but that in action it takes place means its a possibility that transitions from others but not the essential state that describes what we are encountering. if this then is in essence a state change, which it isnt, the only reason we have any energy left for us is that there are physical laws we encounter that cannot fit our model of reality to fuel our curiosity at the least and that that is why science is a participant in existence, not society, and that’s why exclusion is a rare and not a regarded decline or decay. good science is hard to find, models differ the best rates we have but naturally we have no science unless we make mistakes and pay for them. we will be okay if we realize we are wrong but will fail if we attempt to fix the person in the problem with a broken basis for a science by excluding each other as the fault and not the reminder for person as the only nature we describe back to ourselves. so the whole then is cogent and not interpreted. we aren’t here to fail of course but that isn’t necessarily a beginning or an end either. it’s science.

>> No.10322731

>>10322423
he means it requires that there were mistakes and we required ourselves a ladder stepping for notion as a province that meaningful errors are regarded in science as common probabilities, like being caught in a whirlpool and here and there hitting the inside of edges that transpired our course away from surfaces and platforms for the forces of efficacy to take place.

>> No.10322742

>>10322731
What's up with the schizos? Is /x/ down or something?

>> No.10322819

>>10322390
Except that it's literally impossible to prove AND unfalsifiable. Many-worlds is literally just a religion for people who can't accept the wacky nonsense that is the reality of QM.

>> No.10322883

>>10322742
Fuck is wrong with x you prick

>> No.10322887

>>10322215
Many-worlds is the minimal interpretation. It says that the wave function develops according to the schrodinger equation - including any (((observers))). It doesn't try to crudely paste on a "collapse" or "decoherence" ghost story.

>> No.10322889

>>10322394
>shut up and calculate... or else

>> No.10322892

>>10322215
If MWI is so good, how do you deal with an irrational probability?